 Dwi'n rhan o'r ffordd i ddweud i ddweud o drosfer ac i ddweudio'r Blynyddiol, mae'n ddweud o'r ffordd i ddweud i ddweud i ddweudio'r ffordd, ond mae'n rhan o'rifeil 11616 o'r name i'r Martin Whitfield. Ieithi'r Prif Weinidog diwrnod y Pwg Fawr, ond mae'n ddweud o'r ddweud o'r rhwlachion proxifol, I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request to speak buttons. I call on Martin Whitfield to speak to and move the motion on behalf of the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee. I'm very grateful, Presiding Officer, and it has been an afternoon of the small minutiae of law and standing orders and of how places operate, but this is no less important than the stage 3 that we have just gone through, because the motion before the Parliament invites us to agree a permanent proxy voting system being introduced. The pilot is currently running and is due to end on 31 December this year, and as members will be aware, it provides for a member to arrange their vote to be cast by another member acting as proxy in any vote of the meeting of the Parliament or indeed the committee of the whole Parliament. We recognise that there may be certain circumstances in which, even as an MSP, you may need to step away from the obligations and responsibilities of being an MSP places on you. This might be for a period of time due to illness, parental or caring responsibilities or, sadly, in some cases, bereavement. The Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee has conducted an evaluation of the pilot, including an internal consultation with all relevant stakeholders. The responses have indicated that there is support for the provisions that are currently on the temporary system to be made permanent. The committee has reflected in its report on future parliamentary procedures and practices that we consider proxy voting accords with the very founding principles of this Parliament, that to ensure it can be more inclusive and accessible. Indeed, the recent gender sensitive audit recommended that we as a committee propose a permanent standing order to introduce a proxy voting system. We wish the permanent system to be broadly mirroring the current temporary arrangements, namely the standing order sets out in principle that a member may arrange for their vote to be cast as a proxy, but the details of how such a vote may be exercised sit in a separate scheme that is administered by you, the Presiding Officer. John Mason. I thank the member very much for giving way. He has listed reasons why people might not be here. Does he think that there is also a risk of the system being abused, as with the present online system, where it appears that some members just do not bother turning up? Martin Whitefield, I am very grateful for the intervention, but I do not feel that I can be in agreement, even with the substatement about an abuse of the online system. Members of the Scottish Parliament, when they are sent to this place, are sent to this place by constituents who entrust in them a promise to represent their constituents to the very best of their abilities, and I would struggle. Indeed, I find it very difficult to understand a situation where a member who sits within this chamber or indeed rightly understanding orders is contributing in a hybrid way that they would abuse that position. To be in MSP carries with it a responsibility, and I think that it would be very disappointing if an individual chose to abuse that responsibility for whatever reason. I am happy to give way to Bob Doris. Bob Doris. I thank the committee for giving way. I think that Mr Mason is making a distinction between proxy voting and remote voting, which are two very distinct and different things. I support the proposals from the committee, and I praise the committee for its good work in relation to that. However, can I just check that reforms that the committee will suggest to this Parliament remain iterative and devolving, and you will come back at a later date with further reforms in the entire chamber when we get updated and involved in that process? I am very grateful for Bob Doris's intervention. Indeed, all the changes that are proposed sit on this iterative basis, because we will never achieve the perfect chamber. It is always going to be a journey, it will be a voyage, and it is for all Members across this chamber to contribute to that, to add their ideas, opinions, and I and I know the committee and indeed others across this chamber are always more than happy to debate proposals. I merely took the stance I did with the previous intervention because I think it lays an accusation on which there is no real evidence to base it. I was going to take that moment to indeed thank you, Presiding Officer. I hope not in any embarrassing way for your substantial support, contribution and assistance with regard to this matter, which has been both great we received both by myself and of course the committee. The practical operation of this proxy voting proposal will remain as set out in the Presiding Officer's scheme. As detailed in our report, we gave consideration to some of the practical aspects of the scheme. The scheme, I understand, has been finalised and, if endorsed by the chamber today, will be able to be published on 22 December. The only real change between the temporary system that has been in operation and the permanent system that is being proposed is that, within standing orders, we will set out the grounds that a proxy vote can be requested on. The more than welcomes. Kate Forbes. Thank you to the member for taking a third intervention. I was curious as to whether there was evidence as to how we protect members sometimes from being under pressure to adopt a proxy vote when they might be incapacitated and may not be able to actually engage with the substance at hand but might be under pressure to vote nevertheless. Martin Whitfield. The member raises a fascinating and interesting problem that has, to some extent, been handled in both the evidence that we've had but also discussions within the committee. There are a number of ways that votes can be reflected even if not cast across this chamber. The committee in various iterations have visited whether or not we wanted to address the concept that is known as pairing, for example, but what we wanted to do with proxy voting and what the committee wished to do with proxy voting and what was reflected both in the very first debates that the committee brought to this chamber and indeed the discussions that we've had is to protect the members who, under certain circumstances, need to step away from the obligations of being an MSP but still be in a position to reassure their constituents that the constituents vote through their elected representative appears in this chamber for the purposes of legislation. If there was a situation where a member was being pressured by someone else to extend a proxy vote, I deeply hope, as my response to one of the earlier interventions was, I deeply hope they can find it in themselves to reach out and say no because we are sent here. The majority of the constituency MSPs are sent here because of who they are themselves. The list MSPs are obviously sent under a party political list but we are individuals and we have an individual responsibility to our constituents and we should add to that. I realise time is late so I simply want to move the motion that is in my name but on behalf of the committee and I hope, following the vote on behalf of this whole chamber, I'm grateful, Presiding Officer. Thank you. That concludes the debate on standing order rule changes, proxy voting. It's now time to move on to the next item of business, which is consideration of business motion 11737 in the name of George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau on a change to the business programme. Any member who wishes to speak against the motion should press their request to speak button now and I call on George Adam to move the motion. No member has asked to speak against the motion therefore. The question is that motion 11737 be agreed. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed. The next item of business is consideration of business motion 11723 in the name of George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau setting out a business programme and I call on George Adam to move the motion. No member has asked to speak on the motion and the question is that motion 11723 be agreed. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed. The next item of business is consideration of business motion 11724 in the name of George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau on a stage 1 extension. Any member who wishes to speak against the motion should press their request to speak button and I call on George Adam to move the motion. No member has asked to speak against the motion therefore. The question is that motion 11724 be agreed. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed. The next item of business is consideration of two parliamentary bureau motions and I ask George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau to move motions 11725 on approval of an SSI and 11726 on committee meeting times and both moved. Thank you. The question on these motions will be put at decision time and I am mindy to accept a motion without notice under rule 11.2.4 of standing orders that decision time be brought forward to now and I invite the minister for parliamentary business to move the motion. More than happy to do so. Moved. Thank you and the question is that decision time be brought forward to now. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are. So the first question of today's three questions is that motion 11699 in the name of Siobhan Brown on trusts and succession Scotland Bill be agreed and there will be a short suspension to allow members to access the digital voting system.